Hey, Let’s Tap Into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve!

posted at 8:48 am on March 7, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

Another session of Sunday morning shows came around and I found myself watching Meet the Press. (Something which happens more and more since ABC made the disastrous decision to drop the indispensable Jake Tapper as host of This Week in favor of Christiane Amanpour.) One of the guests was President Obama’s Chief of Staff Bill Daley, and the subject of the discussion turned to the rising prices of both gasoline and barrels of oil.

Aha!” I thought. “Now we’re getting down to something important. The administration has been choking off domestic oil production and the unrest on the Arab street is bringing things to a boil. This is a great chance for somebody to step up with a concrete plan.”

Well, it turns out that the White House certainly is considering a plan, but not one that anyone outside of a rubber room could have predicted.

White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley said on Sunday the Obama administration is considering tapping into the U.S. strategic oil reserve as one way to help ease soaring oil prices.

Speaking on NBC television’s “Meet the Press,” Daley said: “We are looking at the options. The issue of the reserves is one we are considering. … All matters have to be on the table.”

There has been support among Senate Democrats for tapping the reserves. Senator Jay Rockefeller on Thursday became the third Democrat to ask President Barack Obama to tap America’s emergency oil supply to cool prices that have risen past $100 a barrel on the strife in Libya.

I’d like to tell you what was said during the rest of the interview, but I threw a brick through my television screen at that point.

So let me see if I’ve got this straight:

  • Oil and gas prices are rising in response to well established laws of supply and demand. Since we’re not going to magically produce all the energy we need for the next few years through “green initiatives” a good portion of this will have to come from fossil fuels for the foreseeable future.
  • We’re not producing enough oil domestically because the federal government is sitting on drilling permits like they’re holding hostages.
  • The foreign sources of oil from many of our overseas suppliers (who we’re supposed to be reducing our dependency upon because most of them don’t like us very much to start with) are now endangered as several of these countries totter on the brink of collapse.

And your solution to the problem may be to start draining our strategic reserves?

Before checking myself into a home for the terminally confused, I dropped a note to Jane Van Ryan of the American Petroleum Institute to see what they thought of such a plan. She writes:

API traditionally has opposed using oil from SPR to address price issues. The reserve was established to protect the United States against an interruption of petroleum supplies, such as occurred after the hurricanes Katrina and Rita. At that time, a few of the oil companies purchased oil from the SPR to maintain the flow of oil products to U.S. consumers.

At this time, there is a significant amount of oil available in the United States, and Saudi Arabia has said it has enough spare production capacity to make up for any shortfalls that might result from the Libyan conflict.

Those reserves are there to protect us, as Jane points out, in the event of a massive disruption in the flow of oil supplies. And for the moment, let’s put aside the commonly held opinion that the Obama administration is currently acting as the biggest disruption of domestic oil supplies. With Libya and other nations in the region experiencing unrest – or the threat of it – I would think that this is precisely the time when the United States would be seeking to top off those reserves, if not expand their total storage capacity. Draining them even before foreign supplies are cut off is nothing short of the height of folly.

And all the while, domestic producers are standing around by the Gulf of Mexico – as our British friends might say – with their tallywhackers in their hands, ready and willing to produce the oil we need, but waiting on Washington approval.

The inmates are running the asylum. I’ve lost most of my capacity to remain civil and balanced on this question. This is a matter of not only energy independence, jobs and fiscal recovery, but of national security. And these sorts of answers rob the Obama administration of any and all credibility when it comes to possessing a sane energy policy.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The best part is, Libyan oil is .5% of our imports, yet oil futures are trading at record levels in america over the violence. what a joke. our real supply is not effected by libya, yet our price has skyrocketed becuase of a bunch of traders making a fortune on futures trading against news.

why is noone discussing this?

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 10:58 AM

I don’t think you understand the situation. First, whether the US purchases Libyan oil is irrelevant. There is a world supply, and Libya contributes to that. When Libyan oil goes offline, there is there is an impact on supply, and demand has to be met from other suppliers, so yes, it does impact the US.

Secondly, speculators don’t drive up the price of oil. They make bets on the future price (hence the futures market), and in fact provide a service in stabilizing what is normally a very volatile market. You wouldn’t want to have everyone buying on the spot market; you wouldn’t know from one day to the next what the price would be. But, guaranteed, the price would be even higher than what it is now.

Thirdly, the taxpayers aren’t subsidizing any speculators, period. The speculators are using their own money to bet on the future price of oil, and as was noted earlier, for every speculator that wins, the man on the opposite side ot the bet loses.

Vashta.Nerada on March 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Mjbrutus,
I can’t blame people formaing legal money. I do,however, lay blame on this and any other administration who continues to allow this to go on. There is nothing wrong with a company taking delivery on oil to hedge with futures. There IS plenty wrong with everyone else trading with our tax dollars.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM

When you’re fat and happy it is quite difficult to plan a menu for the starving. No wonder the “O” poles are in the forties that are taken in the counties around Washington, DC. The government employment is up over eleven percent and the MSM keeps pumping the news sludge at dropping unemployment into the eight percent range.

mixplix on March 7, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Hey, I need a new car.
Think I’ll tap my 401k so I can get a really nice one.
What could go wrong?

VelvetElvis on March 7, 2011 at 12:06 PM

MJBrutus on March 7, 2011 at 10:36 AM

(Sorry, working today.)
No, the comparison is of one of scalability. It takes 20-25 years to go from lab to commercial viability IF all else being equal.
I’m not saying don’t do it.
It’s just not a panacea.

OkieDoc on March 7, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Vashta,

The fed IS loaning to several firms for oil speculating. That’s just fact.

Secondly,speculators ABSOLUTELY drive up the price of oil. Why do you think the price at the pump has jumped 20 or more cents in just a few days? Oil hasn’t been disrupted, only the futures price jacked up by traders. Furthermore, traders pay only a fraction of the cost of the actual trade. February trading was at record levels.

And you’re wrong that spot pricing would be higher. Just look at historical data when the fed wasn’t loaning billions for oil speculation.

Get the facts right brother.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 12:11 PM

And you’re wrong that spot pricing would be higher. Just look at historical data when the fed wasn’t loaning billions for oil speculation.

Get the facts right brother.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Sure. Customer number one wants two tanker loads of crude delivered to the Port of Houston in September of 2011, and customer number two wants 30,000 gallons of refined gasoline in three grades delivered to his gas station tomorrow. Which gets the better price?

Secondly,speculators ABSOLUTELY drive up the price of oil. Why do you think the price at the pump has jumped 20 or more cents in just a few days?

Risk premium – look it up.

Vashta.Nerada on March 7, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Jazz: The explanation is stupifingly simple. Barry Zero and the whole crowd is effing stupid, inept, corrupt, crooked, ad nauseum. It does one no good to try and make sense out of the zoo crew because the situation totally defies explanation.

To attempt to understand it is to invite a level of frustration usually reserved for a tied up hog.

Mr. Grump on March 7, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Give me a Republican nominee who will let us drill for our own oil, build rapidly the number of nuclear reactors that this country needs and overhauls our electrical grid. All this would be a big positive and create a lot of good jobs. Release the powers of the private business sector.

SC.Charlie on March 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM

ALTERNATE HEADLINE:

Wrecking Ball Discovers we have Oil stored up.

PappyD61 on March 7, 2011 at 1:11 PM

every link i post is going to spam

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 1:12 PM

I have not read the all posts on this thread. Has anyone addressed the fact that the oil market does have a nasty group of oil producers that are part of OPEC? OPEC limits the of crude oil on the market, which F’s up the market.

SC.Charlie on March 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM

There is a solution; President Palin.
Drill Baby Drill – January 2013!

Done That on March 7, 2011 at 1:26 PM

That oil is the PEOPLES oil, not the governments, and as Obama is the peoples president, it is his duty to drain it and distribute it amongst the people, how dare the government stockpile and hide this nations resources from its people.

Koa on March 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Refineries are going to be the next problem.

You can’t have one without the other.

upinak on March 7, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Refineries are going to be the next problem.
You can’t have one without the other.
upinak on March 7, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Very true and we have a very vocal crowd of NIMBYS on that issue. However, if we built enough new generation of nuclear power plants, that created very little nuclear waste, they could provide us with electricity that we needed. I don’t know if the current refineries could just be expanded or made more efficient to fill-in the gap. However, my guess is, that new ones must be built.

SC.Charlie on March 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Republican nominee qualifications:
1) Allow for the drilling for oil in the United States
2) Create a program to build a new generation of nuclear power plants to provide for our electrical needs
3) Improve the electrical grid
4) Build new refineries in the United States and upgrade the older ones.

All four of these things can be done with private money/investment ………….. and would create new, well-paying jobs.

SC.Charlie on March 7, 2011 at 3:31 PM

However, my guess is, that new ones must be built.

SC.Charlie on March 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM

they are being built. In Canada. Only problem is you will have to pay a nice big tariff for your gas as well as a Tariff for the ethanol we make here, transport there to mix, and ship back.

Who do you think is getting screwed?

As for the electrical grid, you have to tear it all down before revamping it, so I doubt that will happen soon.

upinak on March 7, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I can’t tell you how frustrating it is to get more of you to understand its the oil speculating that is driving price up. there is plenty of oil and the refineries are running just fine.

rescind clinton’s law allowing the reckless trading of oil futures at 7% or less margins, and everything will be fine.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 4:28 PM

I can’t tell you how frustrating it is to get more of you to understand its the oil speculating that is driving price up. there is plenty of oil and the refineries are running just fine.

rescind clinton’s law allowing the reckless trading of oil futures at 7% or less margins, and everything will be fine.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Ahem, Most of us know already. And some of us work in industry. And most of us know what the deal is. As well as quite a few of us understand what the problem is and where it lays. And some of us own wells. So not many of us are going to jump when you say “speculating” as we have all seen it before, and for years.

How about you chill out?

upinak on March 7, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Ahem, Most of us know already. And some of us work in industry. And most of us know what the deal is. As well as quite a few of us understand what the problem is and where it lays. And some of us own wells. So not many of us are going to jump when you say “speculating” as we have all seen it before, and for years.

How about you chill out?

upinak on March 7, 2011 at 4:34 PM

You know, I’ll chill out when any of my and your elected officials actually address a real economic crisis. Liberals do nothing becuase a high price on gas means “Yeah! Solap panels on our cars!” Republicans don’t seem to do anything because they don’t want to upset the apple cart.

It’s really sickening when you’re a diehard conservative trying to live upon rational American principles, and your daily grind is driven to a halt by crappy trading regulation.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM

It’s really sickening when you’re a diehard conservative trying to live upon rational American principles, and your daily grind is driven to a halt by crappy trading regulation.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Speculating has almost nothing to do with it. Several of us here have been in the industry for years – we know what we are talking about. Speculating is forecasting with real money, and without it, you would be paying more. If you want to help the situation, work on resolving the 70+ different grades of gasoline we have to produce to meet regional regulations. That is a conservative’s fight.

Vashta.Nerada on March 7, 2011 at 4:56 PM

It’s really sickening when you’re a diehard conservative trying to live upon rational American principles, and your daily grind is driven to a halt by crappy trading regulation.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM

you know, when speculating leads to nothing, as it usually does, it is usually people like you who scream the sky is falling.

FYI, the sky has been falling since the 70′s under Carter when they stop building refineries, started adding additives and taking out lead that helped lubercate the engines. Speculating now isn’t helping NOW.

So, chicken little… how about domestic production, surreal production, projected, projected reserves, projected production and other items that would be a “speculation” of why oil is going up as well. There is a reason why oil and gas comps hirer… economists! It isn’t just the little day traders you are accusing! These economists “speculate” 1-10-20-50 yrs in the futures via what reserves they have at that moment. If you have never seen a BP or Exxon speculating forecast for oil projection, I suggest you find an area you can go to one, and get informed!

Also it is the taxes on the oil, before it is even taken out of the formations and refined into whatever it is your heart desires. Keep that in mind as you freak out.

upinak on March 7, 2011 at 5:07 PM

I always find Ed Wallace to have insightful comments on oil:

“As in the past, recent events have negatively affected the price of oil. It jumped on the fear that the Egyptian uprisings might shut down the Suez Canal; it jumped again with the turmoil in Libya. In America the price of gasoline leapt by 16 cents per gallon on one day a week ago, (A similar amount on one day this week) even though the gasoline futures market is supposed to be driven by supply and retailers’ demand – no matter what the media report, it’s not necessarily directly tied to the price of oil.

“Yes, oil prices can rise if refiners fear future deliveries may come up short. But if gasoline demand is weak and supplies are high it is supposed to fall in price, at least in the near term. Of course, the day that gasoline jumped in concert with oil, we had 241 millions barrels of already refined gasoline in our inventories, a figure that you’d have to go back decades to match. Furthermore, according to the American Petroleum Institute, that same week our refineries ran at only 79 percent of capacity.”

More of his statements here:
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/03/04/2896981/oil-crises-and-history.html

ricer1 on March 7, 2011 at 6:39 PM

So, chicken little… how about domestic production, surreal production, projected, projected reserves, projected production and other items that would be a “speculation” of why oil is going up as well. There is a reason why oil and gas comps hirer… economists! It isn’t just the little day traders you are accusing! These economists “speculate” 1-10-20-50 yrs in the futures via what reserves they have at that moment. If you have never seen a BP or Exxon speculating forecast for oil projection, I suggest you find an area you can go to one, and get informed!

Also it is the taxes on the oil, before it is even taken out of the formations and refined into whatever it is your heart desires. Keep that in mind as you freak out.

upinak on March 7, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Where to begin:

First off, my argument does not discount the importance of drilling or improved infrastructure of the oil industry. You seem to automatically think I’m against increased domestic production and refining. Did I ever make that argument? If you’ve been here for as long as I have, you may have read the many comments where I support increased production and refining. Of course, you seem so hell bent to take potshots at an argument I wasn’t making.

Secondly, taxes. Have taxes gone up 24 cents a gallon over the last two weeks? No, they haven’t. So that point is moot. Again, you want less taxes on oil, fine. I don’t give a darn. I don’t believe taxes solve any real problems, they only mitigate them. So you won’t get an argument from me about lowering taxes, but taxes aren’t what’s spiking the price of oil.

Finally, its not BP and Exxon’s speculating that drive the price. Take the time to research the ecnomics of the price of a gallon of gas since 2000, and the fact remains that proprietary trading with miniscule margins have driven the price through the roof. February’s speculatory trading broke all previous records, and its stated that over 80% of speculatory trading this year has no deliverables.

Why don’t you cool your accusations against me if you don’t know where I stand on issues so close to your heart? But since you know now, maybe you can pipe down a bit.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Ahem, Most of us know already. And some of us work in industry. And most of us know what the deal is. As well as quite a few of us understand what the problem is and where it lays. And some of us own wells. So not many of us are going to jump when you say “speculating” as we have all seen it before, and for years.

How about you chill out? – upinak on March 7, 2011 at 4:34 PM

To make it simple to the idiots. The future expected price of crude oil is driving up the price of current inventory. You don’t sell a $5 dollar item on the the self for the usual mark-up, when you know the the future cost to you will be $10 next week.

SC.Charlie on March 7, 2011 at 8:42 PM

Tap Into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve!

Similar to going to the bank and taking money out of savings to play the slot machine.

If anything can be more stupid let me know.

enginemike on March 7, 2011 at 8:53 PM

Thank you SC.Charlie and blink.

Vincenzo on March 7, 2011 at 11:37 PM

So the reduction in oil supply has nothing to do with oil prices? It’s all these evil speculators? Not buying it. Increased supply = lower prices. Economics 101, “Google” it. Even if you’re right, that’s no reason to cost people their jobs and cause economic devastation, as Obama has been doing with his ill-advised permitorium. Drill, baby, drill.

R. Waher on March 8, 2011 at 2:21 AM

So the reduction in oil supply has nothing to do with oil prices? It’s all these evil speculators? Not buying it. Increased supply = lower prices. Economics 101, “Google” it. Even if you’re right, that’s no reason to cost people their jobs and cause economic devastation, as Obama has been doing with his ill-advised permitorium. Drill, baby, drill.

R. Waher on March 8, 2011 at 2:21 AM

Oil supplies are at least 10 year highs, and so are refined gas supplies(at least close to ten year highs).

There is no domestic oil reserve shortage.

It IS speculators.

Vincenzo on March 8, 2011 at 11:00 AM

That oil is the PEOPLES oil, not the governments, and as Obama is the peoples president, it is his duty to drain it and distribute it amongst the people, how dare the government stockpile and hide this nations resources from its people.

Koa on March 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Obama has already ‘stepped up’ to his duty to “drain and distribute” the PEOPLES money

And if you dare to ask what we’re going to do when we have no more resources…you must be RACIST!!!

/sarc>

landlines on March 8, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Oil supplies are at least 10 year highs, and so are refined gas supplies(at least close to ten year highs).

There is no domestic oil reserve shortage.

It IS speculators.

Vincenzo on March 8, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Actually they are going on a 30 yr high. In which “speculators’ go off of since BP and Exxon do a yrly analysis. Hmmm

You still didn’t discount what I said earlier. And I am really dissappointed with most of those “Day Traders” such as Blink and others, it is interesting to know the “industry” and what they do compared to what you do not know.

But hey, we just look for that beautiful sweet crude that is a fluid investment for the idiots like you. :)

upinak on March 8, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Comment pages: 1 2